Is your view of power-as-freedom the same as personal power?

No, power-as-freedom is not the same as personal power, although at first it might seem like just a difference in semantics, but in truth, it is not.  From my perspective, there is a difference as when that term is used, it is used to mean different things by different people.  It’s a limiting term in the sense that it differentiates power into a type called personal.  For me there are only two types, power-as-control and power-as-freedom and both types manifest in innumerable forms.  So, personal power is a form of power that can either be used in the interests of control or freedom.  Another difference is that power, again from my perspective, applies not just to individuals, but also to groups of any size, and has the same four dimensions (awareness, choices, freedom to act intentionally, and involvement in creating change) and characteristics whether we are talking about a person or a group.  Another difference, of course, is that no other theory of power derives from Martha E. Rogers’ framework.  This refers to the power-as-freedom type of power reflecting a non-material, non-deterministic, acausal worldview. I have come to consider it a spiritual worldview that is ancient and broad-based and yet, Rogers’ science of unitary human beings is unique in perspective.  In contrast what I named power-as-control is the materialistic, deterministic, cause and effect type of power.  At some point I had an epiphany that power is power and all theories and descriptions of power can be categorized as power-as-control or power-as-freedom.  This power-as-control and power-as-freedom categorization is not to say the other perspectives on power are the same as the Barrett theory of power.  In examining these other ideas about power, there are sometimes similarities, yet it seems there is invariably something that is different or in conflict with the Barrett theory.